> In the land of Christ , Christianity is dying

[Assad]

In the land of Christ , Christianity is dying

Since one can say the spirit lives within, does it matter that there be no Living Witnesses to Christianity - in the land where the faith of a billion adherents was born? How might the removal of all Christians affect the Muslims of the Holy Land? Will they become weaker or stronger, more secular minded or more militant? In short, does the dying of Christianity in the Land of Christ have political as well as religious significance for the world at large?

Today, only about 40,000 Christians remain. In 1948, between 60 and 70 percent of the Palestinian Christians were driven from their ancestral homes with the creation of a Jewish state. Since the 1967 illegal Israeli occupation of their lands, an additional 20,000 Christians have felt a necessity to leave their homeland. Formerly the population of Jerusalem, in Christian tradition the "mother of all churches," was half Christian. Now Christians in the Holy City are so few that "with a couple of jumbo jets you could move them all out," said Jonathan Kuttab, a Jerusalem Christian, U.S.-educated attorney.

Under the British Mandate, Palestine officially was a Christian country, with Bethlehem having a population that was 90 percent Christian. Now the town that gave birth to Christ - and Christianity - has only about 10 percent Christian. And in what remains of Palestine, one finds only one town - Beit Sahour - with a Christian majority. It, too, is being threatened: planned Jewish settlements could change the demography, make it predominately Jewish. "The Israelis have targeted the Palestinian Christian community for extinction," Beit Sahour Christian leader Elias Rishmawi told me. "We are an endangered species."

Wanting Christians and Christianity eliminated, some Zionist-dominated publishers and institutions already are writing them off the map: "I saw a widely-distributed Atlas, published in New York," Naim Ateek, a Palestinian Christian leader and canon of St. George's Cathedral, said.

"It has maps and populations, and for the Holy Land it lists the number of Jews and the number of Muslims, but makes no mention whatsoever of Christians. And I'll give you another example: The Israelis held conference at Hebrew University - it was on religions of the Holy Land. Topics dealt with Judaism and Islam. They made no mention of Christianity. An American Christian woman, attending the conference, asked,'Why are you not including Christianity?' And an Israeli said, 'The numbers of Christians here are insignificant. They no longer matter.

Palestine is known as the land of resurrection. It is Christ's message. Can Christianity in the land of his birth and ministry pass from a dying stage to experience a resurrection? Or has Zionism gained the victory? Do Christians in the West care? I put those questions to Alex Ewad, a Palestinian Baptist minister: "Jerusalem is an issue to 14 million Jewish people, it is an issue to a billion Muslim people - but not yet an issue for the billion Christians around the world. Unless this changes, our Holy Land will become a graveyard of Christianity. (By: Grace Halsell, 1995)

[Assad]

In 1994, the Israelis began a promotional campaign to bring "millions of Christians" to celebrate the Christmas, 1995 season as well as other millions for the Year 2000 observation. As Christians pointed out to me, Bethlehem is in Palestine - under military occupation. Tourists going there must pass roadblocks. Often so many Israeli soldiers crowd Manger Square it appears under siege. Rather than observe Christ's birth in Bethlehem, Israelis are staging promotional campaigns to move them to Nazareth that lies within Israel. "To get ready for a big influx of Christian tourists, the Israelis have a drive spearheaded by Uri Moore, and are asking U.S. Christian churches to 'kick in' to make Nazareth more of a tourist center, as well as to pay for all security guards at the Christian sites," said Baptist Minister Ewad. He added, "I think it is a crime to give money to the Jewish state - to take care of our Christian sites."

The Israelis, in a brochure sent to travel writers and issued by their Ministry of Tourism, state that "in preparation for the Year 2000, a massive renovation and infrastructure development will take place in Nazareth, birthplace of Jesus." In reading this statement, I am left wondering: did the Israeli writing the brochure not know where Jesus was born? Did the officials with the Israel Ministry of Tourism, some of whom must have read copy on the brochure, not know? Did they not care? Or rather - since they will be able to move tourists in and out of Nazareth more easily than militarily-occupied Bethlehem - that they plan to "sell" the idea he was born where they want tourists to go?

"The Israelis control all our lives - and even our holy sites," Christian said. Indeed, while permitting the Palestinians to establish a "tourism department," it has no authority over West Bank religious and archaeological sites, such as the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, on the site where Jesus was born. Such sites remain under control of the military government. For Christmas 1994 in Bethlehem, the Israeli army escorted the Christian mayor inside his own church. As for the past 28 years, all the activities for the Christian celebration were directed by armed Israeli soldiers.

Earlier, I mentioned my father being the most Christian man I ever knew. And how much he would have loved to have traveled in the footsteps of Jesus. Could he have gone, I think he would have looked or acted like most of today's tourists - who go with cameras and return with photos and souvenirs. My father would have traveled light - going not as a tourist but rather as a pilgrim - going on an inner journey. Perhaps sitting by the Sea of Galilee, he would have asked himself, What is Christ's message - for me? I am sure he would have eagerly sought out other Christians, such as Elias Chacour of Galilee who changed so many lives by his moving memoir, "Blood Brothers." I feel sure my Methodist father and Greek Catholic Chacour would have liked breaking bread together, enjoying their communion, as followers of Christ.

There are hundreds of Jewish agencies that book Christian tourists to the Holy Land. But one need not go as tourist. As we approach the Year 2000, one might like to go to the Land of Christ as a pilgrim. Here is a suggestion of how to do so:
__________________
It?s immoral and cowardice to ask Muslims not to resist foreign aggression

[Assad]

he newly elected Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem, Theophilos III, submitted a petition to the High Court on Wednesday in which he and the Greek Orthodox Patriarchy accused the government of Israel of making its recognition of the patriarch conditional on his signing of "questionable" real estate deals.

The petition reveals new information about the long-term leasing deals in the old city of Jerusalem, in which leasing rights of Patriarchy assets for hundreds of years were awarded "at prices that can scarcely be imagined."'

Prices for stolen goods
'The assets mentioned include the Imperial Hotel at the Jaffa Gate, for the sum of $1.25 million, the Petra Hotel at the same location for $500,000, effective leasing of the Saint John Hostel in the old city, which Ateret Kohanim has already taken over, for $400,000, and a deal not previously reported - the leasing of a plot of land inside the old city, for $55,000, effective leasing of the Saint John Hostel in the old city, which Ateret Kohanim has already taken over, for $400,000, and a deal not previously reported - the leasing of a plot of land inside the old city, for $55,000.

The deals were arranged with foreign companies registered in the Virgin Islands. The Patriarchy claims that "the prices are ridiculous in relation to the assets' location and value, and would more appropriately be termed prices for stolen goods."

The petition states that in light of the fact that Ireneos claimed he did not know about the deals, and that he was tricked by Ateret Cohanim and Papadimas, the "bizarreness" of Israel's demands is even more magnified. Israel's government is supposed to transfer a document of approval to the new Patriarch to allow him to sign contracts and run the Patriarchy's official business. According to the petition, nonrecognition of the Patriarchy effectively condemns it to economic paralysis.

Although it is perceived as the richest ecclesiastical institution in Israel, the petition claims that the Patriarchy is in fact submerged in heavy debt, approaching NIS 50 million.

Church officials refused to say who in Israel's government had allegedly applied pressure on Theophilos to agree to the deals, but on condition of anonymity, said that the messages had been conveyed to Theophilos and to other parties by Tzachi Hanegbi, Minister for Jerusalem Affairs.

'Referred to authorized parties'

Theophilos' aides attached to the petition official Israeli responses to their requests to recognize Theophilos. To the first request, dated September 18, the Prime Minister's Office replied that "the matter was referred to the authorized parties." A second request from October 10 was answered by Government Secretary Yisrael Maimon, who wrote that Israel views the dismissal of Ireneos and the election of Theophilos as "an internal church dispute," and that Israel does not view itself a party in the matter and does not "interfere in internal church matters." The latter document refers to the ousted Ireneos as "Patriarch of Jerusalem," and to the newly elected patriarch as "Archbishop Theophilos III."

Patriarchy officials said that non-recognition of the Patriarch elect is in itself a "rude and blatant interference," and that Maimon's letter reveals the government's true intentions.

[Assad]

The LA Times ? normally one of the bastions of American Zionism ? has a nice little opinion piece by Robert Fisk - the world's most-decorated Christian foreign correspondent - on the pressures on American journalists in the Middle East not to report the truth.

"I first realized the enormous pressures on American journalists in the Middle East when I went some years ago to say goodbye to a colleague from the Boston Globe. I expressed my sorrow that he was leaving a region where he had obviously enjoyed reporting. I could save my sorrows for someone else, he said. One of the joys of leaving was that he would no longer have to alter the truth to suit his paper's more vociferous readers."